search for: x86subtargets

Hi! when reading X86Subtarget.h the methods seem a bit disordered, therefore I would propose to sort them new: -getTargetTriple() -cpu features (e.g. hasSSE1()) -os types (e.g. isTargetDarwin()) -object types (e.g. isTargetELF()) -callconv related functions (e.g. isTargetWin64(), consider renaming to isCallConvWin64(), getStackAlignment()) -pic functions perhaps my problem of generating elf

Hello, Matthew. > My file size matches the patched file. I haven't figured out how to get 7-zip to give me checksum information on windows. Use md5sum utility. It can be successfully found via google. > I rashly copied all the *.o files from my mingw\lib directory to the llvm\lib directory. > This does enable the hello world binary to compile and to function correctly. Strange.

ola, ive been looking at adding support for an -msave-args option for use on x86_64. the short explanation of it is that it makes x86_64 function prologues store their register arguments on the stack. the purpose of this is to make the arguments trivially accessible for things like stack traces with arguments. as per https://blogs.oracle.com/sherrym/entry/obtaining_function_arguments_on_amd64,

The current rule is: /// IsLegalToCallImmediateAddr - Return true if the subtarget allows calls /// to immediate address. bool X86Subtarget::IsLegalToCallImmediateAddr(const TargetMachine &TM) const { if (In64BitMode) return false; return isTargetELF() || TM.getRelocationModel() == Reloc::Static; } But this is not doing the correct thing for ELF PIC. The straight-forward way to fix

Does this fix it? Index: lib/Target/X86/X86Subtarget.h =================================================================== --- lib/Target/X86/X86Subtarget.h (revision 48879) +++ lib/Target/X86/X86Subtarget.h (working copy) @@ -144,9 +144,12 @@ std::string getDataLayout() const { const char *p; - if (is64Bit()) - p = "e-p:64:64-s:64-f64:64:64-i64:64:64-f80:128:128"; -

Probably better to move the discussion to a bug? Evan On Mar 27, 2008, at 9:04 AM, Duncan Sands wrote: > Does this fix it? > > Index: lib/Target/X86/X86Subtarget.h > =================================================================== > --- lib/Target/X86/X86Subtarget.h (revision 48879) > +++ lib/Target/X86/X86Subtarget.h (working copy) > @@ -144,9 +144,12 @@ > >

> I promise I'll do the review of your code after that. Tim, I don’t want to push too much. But since there’s 3.4 release on the horizon, maybe you could find a moment review this patch. Especially Haswell is all there since few months. Cheers, -- Adam --- lib/Support/Host.cpp | 8 ++++++++ lib/Target/X86/X86Subtarget.cpp | 3 ++- 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 1

Henning, I believe the code that is supposed to do this is in: lib/Target/X86/X86Subtarget.cpp in X86Subtarget::AutoDetectSubtargetFeatures() Is there a bug in that function? -Hal On Thu, 24 May 2012 23:56:48 +0200 (CEST) Henning Thielemann <llvm at henning-thielemann.de> wrote: > > On Thu, 24 May 2012, Pan, Wei wrote: > > > Very likely AVX is not enabled in your llc.

The target description .td files are allowed to change the default allocation order on a register class by overriding the allocation_order_begin() and allocation_order_end() methods on TargetRegisterClass. Previously, this was used all the time to filter out stack and frame pointers and other reserved registers. I was able to remove most of these custom allocation orders in the tree because the

Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> writes: > On Jul 5, 2010, at 3:31 AM, Óscar Fuentes wrote: > >> Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> writes: >> >>> On Jul 4, 2010, at 6:43 PM, Óscar Fuentes wrote: >>> >>>> In X86Subtarget.h there is a method `getDataLayout' which selects the >>>> data layout depending on the

Hi Adam, > OK. I know the reason you cannot reproduce it, before posting > the patch I've decided to check for AVX before checking AVX2, > just not to cpuid AVX2 when we don't have AVX1 anyway. I suspect it was also incompetence on my part. Given the differences I'm seeing now I can't believe there'd be *no* difference in my tests if I'd done them properly.

Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> writes: > On Jul 4, 2010, at 6:43 PM, Óscar Fuentes wrote: > >> In X86Subtarget.h there is a method `getDataLayout' which selects the >> data layout depending on the platform, ignoring whatever the user setted >> with Module::setDataLayout. >> >> What's the rationale for this? > > Data layout is a

Here you go: Starting program: /home/chandlerc/code/compilers/build/llvm-gcc/gcc/cc1 -fpreprocessed -march=k8 testcase.i -o /dev/null warning: no loadable sections found in added symbol-file system-supplied DSO at 0x7fff0d5fe000 [Thread debugging using libthread_db enabled] foocc1: /home/chandlerc/code/compilers/llvm-gcc/gcc/llvm-types.cpp:81: const llvm::Type* llvm_set_type(tree_node*, const

Here we go, updated patch following your advice checking max leaf and porting cpuidex for subleaf (ECX) 0. NOTE: I’ve set Haswell to be not only 60, but also 63, 69 & 70 model, following changes in Linux kernel & Xen. Also set 62 as Ivy Bridge EP aka E5 v3 (which I has in my workstation). Cheers, -- Adam Detects x86 family 6 model 60, 63, 69, 70 CPU that has AVX2 CPUID leaf 7 subleaf

Hey Evan, At the point of the instructions you suggested I step through, X86ISelLowering has this state: - this 0x00000000005fe728 {VarArgsFrameIndex=-842150451 RegSaveFrameIndex=-842150451 VarArgsGPOffset=3452816845 ...} llvm::X86TargetLowering * const + llvm::TargetLowering {TM={...} TD=0x00000000008edac0

> That's far more worrying to me than not being able to detect Haswell. > I can't reproduce the problem here at the moment: both debug and > release builds give identical assembly for Host.cpp. OK. I know the reason you cannot reproduce it, before posting the patch I've decided to check for AVX before checking AVX2, just not to cpuid AVX2 when we don't have AVX1 anyway.

I agree with Tim, you need to implement a GetCpuIDAndInfoEx function in Host.cpp and pass the correct value to ecx. Also you need to verify that 7 is a valid leaf because an invalid leaf is defined to return the highest supported leaf on that processor. So if a processor supports say leaf 6 and not leaf 7, then an access leaf 7 will return the data from leaf 6 causing unrelated bits to be

On Jul 5, 2010, at 3:31 AM, Óscar Fuentes wrote: > Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> writes: > >> On Jul 4, 2010, at 6:43 PM, Óscar Fuentes wrote: >> >>> In X86Subtarget.h there is a method `getDataLayout' which selects the >>> data layout depending on the platform, ignoring whatever the user setted >>> with Module::setDataLayout.

hi ��f�� but in the source code i find this comment. // ELF is a reasonably sane default and the only other X86 targets we // support are Darwin and Windows. Just use "not those". does this means that we can debug jit on windows? i am confused.help 2011/6/7 ��f�� <chenwj at iis.sinica.edu.tw>: > Hi, Tang > >> result is correct. But on windows, i failed. Why? I build

Hi, Tang > but in the source code i find this comment. > // ELF is a reasonably sane default and the only other X86 targets we > // support are Darwin and Windows. Just use "not those". I guess you found above comment in lib/Target/X86/X86Subtarget.h. But I think X86Subtarget.h is only related to the codegen, but NOT the debugging information. The comment means you can